Thanks Troy In this case for other reasons the customer is deploying a base image to users via USB stick. The stick will also have Office & VPN software on it and the remainder of the stick will be used for a combination of scratch space and content to seed to BranchCache cache.
We're anticipating that they don't see WIMs going around THAT often. > On 2 Mar 2016, at 23:03, Troy Martin <troy.mar...@1e.com> wrote: > > Hey Jason, > > One consideration for managing the realities of WAN optimization devices > (i.e. Riverbed) in place of DPs, is during OS migrations and trying to keep > the large OSD content “fresh” on the devices. WAN/Riverbed devices often > come with “not enough” disk space when it comes to hosting OSD content and > other business content simultaneously i.e. Sharepoint, file-sharing, etc. > Upgrading to larger disks on the devices can be very costly. In 2011, we > wrote a blog about it. > > Back then, OSD content was indeed large. But back then, one may have been > only managing a few images (.wim)…and that’s it. With Windows 10 as you > know, all of that has changed and many are likely to be managing not only a > few images (and then a .wim for each supported architecture type) but also > the OS Upgrade Package (.iso) content for each Windows 10 edition supported > (and then a .iso for each supported OS architecture type). > > · OS Image Packages (.wim) for Wipe-n-Load and Refresh scenarios > · OS Upgrade Packages (.iso) for In-Place Upgrade scenarios > > Take a look at the slide below from a webinar we did last year, as it > explains what the potential is in supporting the minimum total content size > required to support Windows 10 OSD (i.e. minimum total content size, based on > the supported OS editions and architecture types): > > <image001.png> > > Not many have the luxury of being guaranteed ~25GB of diskspace for OSD on > each WAN/WAAS/Riverbed device in the environment. What would it cost a > business to upgrade all of the devices so that ~25GB could be guaranteed…just > for OSD? > > You can see that solely relying on WAAS/Riverbed devices for Windows 10 OSD > purposes alone will be a very costly proposition to the business. > > Not trying to sell anything in this reply, but merely attempting to help the > community where we can because “we’ve been there, done that” and want to > bring value by helping to avoid some of the pitfalls. Hopefully, this helps > to build your case for the design being proposed. > > Yes, our goal as a software company is to sell software. But we also want to > help educate the community and industry that we are all so passionate about, > whenever we can. > > This is what 1E is all about J > > Troy L. Martin | Technical Architect > 1E | Software Lifecycle Automation for the Digital Business > US Mobile: +1 (678) 898-6147 | UK Phone : +44 208 326 9141 > troy.mar...@1e.com | www.1e.com > > Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Blogs | RSS > > From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] > On Behalf Of Jason Wallace > Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 4:58 PM > To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com > Subject: Re: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices > > I guess then Ed it depends upon your definition of "simple" is. > > If "simple" is having to deploy an additional agent to my entire client > estate instead of enabling a feature which is already built into the core OS > then I guess you've got me there. > > If simple is having to update my product using a channel which is not the > base update channel in CM then yup, again you have me. > > I grant you that BranchCache is nowhere near the sophistication that some > peer caching technologies have. > > I'm not trying to convince anyone to buy anything Ed. My brief is to deploy > using out of the box technology where possible and that is what I am doing. I > have a fallback position that I am comfortable with. > > On 2 Mar 2016, at 21:16, Ed Aldrich <ed.aldr...@1e.com> wrote: > > “…I am planning on using simple, cheaper and well proven technology” > > Can’t argue cheaper… but simple and well proven, I’d just say that 30million > Nomad licenses over 1700 customers argues nicely for “well proven”. > > …and I’m out. > > Ed Aldrich |Technical Enablement Lead > 1E | Software Lifecycle Automation for the Digital Business > Mobile: (401) 924-2293 > ed.aldr...@1e.com | www.1e.com > <image003.png> Ent Client Mgmt MVP (2003-2016) > > From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] > On Behalf Of Jason Wallace > Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 3:26 PM > To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com > Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices > > Thanks John > > This customer is deploying Riverbeds as we speak. > > No, not in the slightest – I am not trying to run a DP on the appliance – > just want to be familiar with what it can offer when it sits between the > small number of DPs that we will be hosting in Azure and the clients which > will largely be running BranchCache. > > Were I to have a branch office scenario where I needed a DP and I couldn’t > have a DP then I would aim to use a peer caching technology (which we are > doing for free) or buy one (in this case, it likely would be a different > product to Nomad) so I am planning on using simple, cheaper and well proven > technology J > > Jason > > From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] > On Behalf Of Marcum, John > Sent: 02 March 2016 19:57 > To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com > Subject: RE: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices > > Jeeze… that post was 5 years ago! Nobody uses Riverbeds anymore. When I did > say that I liked Riverbeds it was only as a WAN accelerator not anything > more. It sounds like you are trying to run a DP on the appliance. If that’s > the case I’m unfamiliar with that use case, probably because as I said…Nobody > uses riverbeds anymore. J > > If I had a branch office scenario where I needed a DP and I couldn’t have a > DP I’d buy nomad and be done with it. That is simple, cheap and well proven > technology. > > > > > > > > John Marcum > MCITP, MCTS, MCSA > Desktop Architect > Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP > <image004.png> > <image005.png> > > From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] > On Behalf Of Jason Wallace > Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 10:29 AM > To: ms...@lists.myitforum.com > Subject: [mssms] Use of Riverbeds at remote offices > > Hi there folks > > I was wondering if someone would have some detail on using Riverbed > Steelheads with CM Agents please? > > We are working on a CM design with DPs at a head office location hosting > BranchCache and clients at remote offices. Between them we have a number of > SteelHeads and I am keen to find out more about how this scenario stands up. > > The customer only supports Riverbedding HTTPS traffic so the assumption is > that we will be supplying the web server certs of the DPs so that they can > get at the data while in transit in order to cache it > > As I have been BinGoogling I have found that Mr Marcum is a fan but Mr Sandys > is not > > https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/systemcenter/en-US/d9ced859-9fe9-4210-9418-3b3f5e02be45/riverbed-scenario?forum=configmgrgeneral > > I also note that RiOS 8.5 introduced support for BranchCache in hosted mode. > Now I know that CM does not support Hosted mode, running in distributed mode > but should the customer implement this does anyone know if the Riverbeds then > publish a service connection point? > > Best Wishes > > Jason > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be protected > by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have received this > message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and > then delete it from your computer. > > > > > > Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is > addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this > message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this > email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email > and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized > use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is > strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the > author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this > email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract. > > > > > > Legal Notice: This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is > addressed. If you are not an intended recipient and have received this > message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this > email or calling +44(0) 2083269015 (UK) or +1 866 592 4214 (USA). This email > and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential. The unauthorized > use, disclosure, copying or printing of any information it contains is > strictly prohibited. The opinions expressed in this email are those of the > author and do not necessarily represent the views of 1E Ltd. Nothing in this > email will operate to bind 1E to any order or other contract. >
